A female babysitter who romped with a 'sex-mad' boy aged just 11 was spared jail after the child's father said his son saw it as a "notch on his belt".
|Jade Hatt, 21, who was convicted of having sex with an 11-year-old boy|
But the boy's father, who had a previous sexual relationship with the woman, stood up in court to defend Hatt, and described her as immature.
He said his son is "sex mad" and was "fully up for the experience", seeing it as a "notch on his belt".
The court heard the incident in November lasted around 45 seconds, following which the boy admitted he had not enjoyed it as he knew it was wrong.
Hannah Squire, prosecuting, told Swindon Crown Court: "The defendant was friends with the boy's father, with whom she had had a brief sexual relationship.
"He would ask her to babysit; she had babysat his 11-year-old son on six or seven occasions. On one of those occasions this offence took place.
"It was during the day and the boy was off school. The defendant arrived at about 11.30am.
"The boy was laying down, Jade Hatt sat on top of him, sat astride him, took off her clothes and removed his.
"In his words she started bouncing on his private parts. Sexual intercourse took place.
"According to him it was fairly brief: about 45 seconds. She told him she enjoyed it, he said he had not as it was wrong."
She said the boy's dad noticed he had a love bite on his neck and texts from Hatt were diverted to his phone, revealing what had taken place.
Police were called and when arrested, she told officers the boy had told her he was 15, even though she knew his age as his father had told her.
Hatt, from Swindon, Wiltshire, pleaded guilty to sexual activity with a child.
Rob Ross, defending, said his client was a small, immature, woman and the victim was very advanced for his years.
Reading from a statement from the dad he told the court: "He said 'I know he told her he was 15. He looks older than his years.
"He is sex mad. He would have been fully up for this experience and in many ways sees it as a notch on his belt and is totally unaffected by it."
Mr Ross said petite Hatt 'clearly doesn't operate at the level of a 20-year-old' and was honest with the police about what had taken place.
He said she was vulnerable and had a hard upbringing, spending two years in hospital with leukaemia between the ages of five and seven.
Passing sentence Judge Tim Mousley QC said it was an exceptional case allowing him to step outside the rigours of the sentencing guidelines.
He said: "Having read everything before me, it was quite clear he was a mature 11-year-old and you were an immature 20-year-old so that narrows the arithmetic age gap between you.
"I have read the comments of the boy's father to the police where he doesn't consider you a typical 20-year-old.
"I have also read what he has said about the effect on the victim."
Just how credible is the boy's father? Having had a sexual relationship with the girl, knowing what she was like, he still put her in charge of his "sex-mad" son. One has to question who really is sex-mad here; it could well be everyone except the boy who clearly felt guilt at the act - that does not match my definition of sex-mad.
I am not without sympathy for this girl, but the dynamics of this case stink. I think Hatt probably needs some help and could suffer horrendously in prison. I would also like to see the boy get psychologically evaluated to see if, in fact, he is really unaffected by it. I would also like to see the father assessed as to his fitness to be a father.
He imposed a six month jail term suspended for two years with supervision and said she must register as a sex offender for seven years.
Judge Mousley also imposed a sexual harm prevention order banning her from having unsupervised contact with young boys for two years.
The judge has been heavily criticised after he refused to send the paedophile.
The NSPCC slammed Judge Tim Mousley QC for sending a 'deeply worrying signal' to the general public about child sex abuse.
The judge was RIGHT not to send Jade Hatt to prison for abusing boy, 11
But Rob Ross, Counsel for Hatt, said the judge was absolutely right to do so because it was 'an exceptional case'.
Ross said Judge Tim Mousley would not have been swayed by the fact the offender was a woman babysitting a boy.
Isn't that the whole point?
Rob Ross criticised the NSPCC for a 'knee-jerk' reaction to the case.